Has your opinion of Jim Benning changed?

[Diamonddog01]

That didn't happen.

Have we really resorted to making things up to try and further discredit Jim Benning (not that that hasn't been going on here for years)?

It's interesting, initially a poster fabricated a story to attempt to discredit the Petterson pick...but after Benning later picked Hughes now there's an attempt by some (this is not directed at @420Canuck) to minimize the role of the GM in drafting in general. Just more convoluted mental gymnastics to give him no credit for anything positive whatsoever. Or to put it more simply - all bad thing are due to Benning, and all good things are due to other staff.

 

[Beezeral]

It's interesting, initially a poster fabricated a story to attempt to discredit the Petterson pick...but after Benning later picked Hughes now there's an attempt by some (this is not directed at @420Canuck) to minimize the role of the GM in drafting in general. Just more convoluted mental gymnastics to give him no credit for anything positive whatsoever. Or to put it more simply - all bad thing are due to Benning, and all good things are due to other staff.

From reading numerous drafting articles, how most teams do it.

The scouts do 95% of the scouting and groundwork for the draft, while the GM focuses on the 1st round pick. Scouts will say "Hey, GM x, if we pick in the 5-10 range, here are 10 guys that are likely to be our best option at this pick." GM will do his due diligence and see those players himself. Once he's done his due diligence, he will reconvene with scouts and they will set their ranking for the 1st round pick. GM will obviously make the final decision on the floor. As for the rest of the draft, GM takes on a CEO role and essentially lets the scouts run the show. Scouts will essentially "lobby" for a player they like to be picked and the GM will go with whoever does the best job of convincing him. Often enough, the later round picks are pre-determined in advance of draft day.

Do the Canucks do it this way? probably. Don't know for sure, and I don't really care. Just trying to add some clarity to what seems a mess of a discussion.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

You said you read my posts then you mention Sutter who I haven't mentioned once ITT, and not some of the other players I've mentioned. Weird. Almost like you made up your mind about the content of my posts before reading them and went into full defense/deflection mode.

Ok let me make it easy for you then.
Here’s your post:
“They have 18-20 million in cap space for next year and only 14 players under contract. Assuming a 23 man roster, that’s roughly 2 million per slot. Obviously some of those guys will
Sign for 1 mill or less. But assume Markstrom gets a much deserved raise to around 5 million. That’s 13-15 left for 8 guys. Assume Tanev takes 4.5 million again, down to 9.5-11.5 for 7 slots.”

Let me know if I need to spell out further as to why trading Sutter to create cap space is relevant for your analysis. If so, I can do so but I thought it was pretty obvious.

Now, presumably when you say Benning is a terrible GM you are comparing him to other GMs who you consider are at least average. I used Florida as an example because you said they are on the right track. Presumably you are also familiar with their cap situation. They have $10 million tied up in a goalie for 7 years and that goalie has a .897 save percentage. A quick glance shows that they are up against the cap. Any other contracts that you would consider bad? It’s likely their first year in the playoffs like the Canucks. How do they improve to be a true contender with no cap space?
If you’re uncomfortable talking about Florida choose another GM that’s been around a while who has a playoff bubble team that we can compare Benning too.
Treleving in Calgary? Wilson in San Jose? Pick who ever you want so we can compare them. I picked Florida because both teams are at a similar stage in their development but I’m open to other comparisons.
I think most Canuck fans will acknowledge that the team has bad contracts expiring in 2 or 3 years that can’t be moved and will impact the moves the teams can make over that period. Most will also acknowledge that Benning is not a great GM. Good at some things and poor at cap management.

 

[Diamonddog01]

From reading numerous drafting articles, how most teams do it.

The scouts do 95% of the scouting and groundwork for the draft, while the GM focuses on the 1st round pick. Scouts will say "Hey, GM x, if we pick in the 5-10 range, here are 10 guys that are likely to be our best option at this pick." GM will do his due diligence and see those players himself. Once he's done his due diligence, he will reconvene with scouts and they will set their ranking for the 1st round pick. GM will obviously make the final decision on the floor. As for the rest of the draft, GM takes on a CEO role and essentially lets the scouts run the show. Scouts will essentially "lobby" for a player they like to be picked and the GM will go with whoever does the best job of convincing him. Often enough, the later round picks are pre-determined in advance of draft day.

Do the Canucks do it this way? probably. Don't know for sure, and I don't really care. Just trying to add some clarity to what seems a mess of a discussion.

I'd agree that the GM focuses on the first round, and thus attempting to minimize credit for Petterson and Hughes is unreasonable. The GM does more than what you've listed - he directs the scouts as to what qualities to focus on and he is involved in the consensus list building process. That involves a group of let's say 10 people around the room hammering out exactly what their order will be going into the draft. He also hires, promotes, demotes and fires scouts and head scouts. Ultimately he is just as responsible for the draft as he is for trades and contracts (which also involve support staff and round table discussions).

 

[WetcoastOrca]

It's interesting, initially a poster fabricated a story to attempt to discredit the Petterson pick...but after Benning later picked Hughes now there's an attempt by some (this is not directed at @420Canuck) to minimize the role of the GM in drafting in general. Just more convoluted mental gymnastics to give him no credit for anything positive whatsoever. Or to put it more simply - all bad thing are due to Benning, and all good things are due to other staff.

The weird thing is that even if the scouts did advise him to take EP, it shouldn’t really change anyone’s opinion. Ultimately it was Bennings decision. A good boss listens to the advice of the quality people that he hired. If Benning did indeed do that, imo that reflects favourably on him. I don’t see it as lucky or a negative at all.

 

[4Twenty]

It's interesting, initially a poster fabricated a story to attempt to discredit the Petterson pick...but after Benning later picked Hughes now there's an attempt by some (this is not directed at @420Canuck) to minimize the role of the GM in drafting in general. Just more convoluted mental gymnastics to give him no credit for anything positive whatsoever. Or to put it more simply - all bad thing are due to Benning, and all good things are due to other staff.

Honestly, I think you guys are just fighting against what you perceive to be piling on.

I don't think anyone is attempting to discredit him for the drafting. Certainly not more than you guys want to believe he was the puller on the strings.

Placate me, if the GM is less involved in the drafting that you're willing to believe, what value is he bringing to the organization?

 

[FreeMcdavid]

William Nylander voted PHWA’s best Comeback Player at Midseason - TSN.ca

Frank Seravalli has Jim Benning as a finalist for the GM of the Year award

1. Joe Sakic
2. Jeff Gorton
3. Jim Benning

 

[Beezeral]

Ok let me make it easy for you then.
Here’s your post:
“They have 18-20 million in cap space for next year and only 14 players under contract. Assuming a 23 man roster, that’s roughly 2 million per slot. Obviously some of those guys will
Sign for 1 mill or less. But assume Markstrom gets a much deserved raise to around 5 million. That’s 13-15 left for 8 guys. Assume Tanev takes 4.5 million again, down to 9.5-11.5 for 7 slots.”

Let me know if I need to spell out further as to why trading Sutter to create cap space is relevant for your analysis. If so, I can do so but I thought it was pretty obvious.

Now, presumably when you say Benning is a terrible GM you are comparing him to other GMs who you consider are at least average. I used Florida as an example because you said they are on the right track. Presumably you are also familiar with their cap situation. They have $10 million tied up in a goalie for 7 years and that goalie has a .897 save percentage. A quick glance shows that they are up against the cap. Any other contracts that you would consider bad? It’s likely their first year in the playoffs like the Canucks. How do they improve to be a true contender with no cap space?
If you’re uncomfortable talking about Florida choose another GM that’s been around a while who has a playoff bubble team that we can compare Benning too.
Treleving in Calgary? Wilson in San Jose? Pick who ever you want so we can compare them. I picked Florida because both teams are at a similar stage in their development but I’m open to other comparisons.
I think most Canuck fans will acknowledge that the team has bad contracts expiring in 2 or 3 years that can’t be moved and will impact the moves the teams can make over that period. Most will also acknowledge that Benning is not a great GM. Good at some things and poor at cap management.

weird. Not my only post on the subject because the other one mentions players like Myers with bad contracts. So you clearly haven't read all of my posts on the subject. But yes, Sutter will need to be moved. Good luck getting someone to take a 4.37 million cap hit for a guy who hasn't broken 35 points since he was 20. That's a cap dump contract, so the Canucks will either have to retain or take bad money back. The reality is that Benning has some solid drafting to hang his hat on and that is it. The rest of his tenure is marred by mostly poor trades and even worse UFA decisions. If that is good enough for you, great. As an outsider, I see a below average GM who I wouldn't want controlling my favorite team.

 

[Diamonddog01]

Honestly, I think you guys are just fighting against what you perceive to be piling on.

I don't think anyone is attempting to discredit him for the drafting. Certainly not more than you guys want to believe he was the puller on the strings.

Placate me, if the GM is less involved in the drafting that you're willing to believe, what value is he bringing to the organization?

I feel differently...and I find myself defending him more frequently than I'd like these days. This whole GM's aren't really involved or responsible for the draft seems somewhat new, and after the false claims about Petterson it's hard not to feel the way I do.

In a hypothetical scenario where say, the President was exclusively responsible for amateur scouting and the draft? Not much. I view Benning as good in the draft, average on trades and RFA contracts and poor at UFA contracts. So if you remove drafting from the equation you have average for 2 and poor, sometimes even horrific, for one. That being said I would agree with OP in that I do think he has improved over the past few years.

Ultimately I view him as an average / mediocre GM and I wouldn't even really care if he was fired tomorrow. On a related note I just find rooting for the team to fail, and our prospects and younger players to fail, simply so the GM is fired is indicative of losing perspective and I am able to give some credit for things I think were good moves.

 

[Beezeral]

I'd agree that the GM focuses on the first round, and thus attempting to minimize credit for Petterson and Hughes is unreasonable. The GM does more than what you've listed - he directs the scouts as to what qualities to focus on and he is involved in the consensus list building process. That involves a group of let's say 10 people around the room hammering out exactly what their order will be going into the draft. He also hires, promotes, demotes and fires scouts and head scouts. Ultimately he is just as responsible for the draft as he is for trades and contracts (which also involve support staff and round table discussions).

I was trying to limit the discussion to how the calls get made on the floor. but yes you are right about the GMs other responsibilities. All I was trying to say was that a GM shouldn't be getting credit/blame because 4th round pick X did or didn't make the NHL. Usually it was a scout that was almost entirely responsible for that pick.

 

[Diamonddog01]

I was trying to limit the discussion to how the calls get made on the floor. but yes you are right about the GMs other responsibilities. All I was trying to say was that a GM shouldn't be getting credit/blame because 4th round pick X did or didn't make the NHL. Usually it was a scout that was almost entirely responsible for that pick.

We'll have to agree to disagree, for the reasons I've earlier listed. If the GM is the one who has the final say on the ultimate draft list (from 1st round to 7 and is an active part of creating that list) and is responsible for the player characteristics that inform that list, as well as being responsible and directly managing all staff involved...well I feel he is responsible for the pick even if he isn't that familiar with the late round prospect in question.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

weird. Not my only post on the subject because the other one mentions players like Myers with bad contracts. So you clearly haven't read all of my posts on the subject. But yes, Sutter will need to be moved. Good luck getting someone to take a 4.37 million cap hit for a guy who hasn't broken 35 points since he was 20. That's a cap dump contract, so the Canucks will either have to retain or take bad money back. The reality is that Benning has some solid drafting to hang his hat on and that is it. The rest of his tenure is marred by mostly poor trades and even worse UFA decisions. If that is good enough for you, great. As an outsider, I see a below average GM who I wouldn't want controlling my favorite team.

So because you didn’t mention Sutter and yet you mentioned no cap room you think it’s weird for me to mention him? That’s a pretty narrow view. Myers is a decent contract imo so I can see why we have different views on the cap.
I’m fine with your conclusion that he’s below average although since you didn’t tell me who you consider to be an average GM most of your post lacks any relevant context. My point was that I see him as similar to Florida’s GM although I’m open to using another baseline to measure him against to see if he is below average. I’ll wait for you to tell me who you consider is average or maybe just above average. I chose Florida because they are both bubble teams making the playoffs for the first time in a while but not yet true contenders. Both are up against the cap if they want to imorive and have bad contracts that will hamper them. If that’s below average in your eyes then I agree with you. I’d probably call both average though with their strengths and weaknesses. I’d say both need an upgrade at management though to get to the next level. So maybe we aren’t that far apart in our assessment of Benning.

 

[4Twenty]

I feel differently...and I find myself defending him more frequently than I'd like these days. This whole GM's aren't really involved or responsible for the draft seems somewhat new, and after the false claims about Petterson it's hard not to feel the way I do.

In a hypothetical scenario where say, the President was exclusively responsible for amateur scouting and the draft? Not much. I view Benning as good in the draft, average on trades and RFA contracts and poor at UFA contracts. So if you remove drafting from the equation you have average for 2 and poor, sometimes even horrific, for one. That being said I would agree with OP in that I do think he has improved over the past few years.

Ultimately I view him as an average / mediocre GM and I wouldn't even really care if he was fired tomorrow. On a related note I just find rooting for the team to fail, and our prospects and younger players to fail, simply so the GM is fired is indicative of losing perspective and I am able to give some credit for things I think were good moves.

How are you sure the claims are false? I’ve seen nothing good to refute them. Just wondering what you’ve seen.

Not sure what a president has to do with what I wrote.

anyways I’ll leave it at this. Thanks for responding. I’d agree there are some positives that could be construed as improvement but I agree the GM isn’t providing much value outside the draft, and we will continue to agree to disagree on how much a GM has to do with drafting.

I'm thankful you called him mediocre and basically suggested your opinion on him hasn't really changed, you're just arguing against the folks rooting their team to fail. I suspected this was the case.

 

[4Twenty]

So because you didn’t mention Sutter and yet you mentioned no cap room you think it’s weird for me to mention him? That’s a pretty narrow view. Myers is a decent contract imo so I can see why we have different views on the cap.
I’m fine with your conclusion that he’s below average although since you didn’t tell me who you consider to be an average GM most of your post lacks any relevant context. My point was that I see him as similar to Florida’s GM although I’m open to using another baseline to measure him against to see if he is below average. I’ll wait for you to tell me who you consider is average or maybe just above average. I chose Florida because they are both bubble teams making the playoffs for the first time in a while but not yet true contenders. Both are up against the cap if they want to imorive and have bad contracts that will hamper them. If that’s below average in your eyes then I agree with you. I’d probably call both average though with their strengths and weaknesses. I’d say both need an upgrade at management though to get to the next level. So maybe we aren’t that far apart in our assessment of Benning.

Why would he have to acknowledge your stance that Sutter will be easily moveable. That's a massive assumption on your part. "lacks relevant context" - hilarious, it doesn't suit your narrative so it's irrelevant.

You chose Florida because you're trying to attack the team he cheers for. It's hilarious that you're trying to pass it off as random selection.

 

[Diamonddog01]

How are you sure the claims are false? I’ve seen nothing good to refute them. Just wondering what you’ve seen.

Not sure what a president has to do with what I wrote.

anyways I’ll leave it at this. Thanks for responding. I’d agree there are some positives that could be construed as improvement but I agree the GM isn’t providing much value outside the draft, and we will continue to agree to disagree on how much a GM has to do with drafting.

I think it's the onus of the individual making the claim to provide evidence as opposed to other individuals to provide evidence that disputes it. If I start claiming that Benning was all set to draft Nylander and Pastrnak in 2014 but ownership overruled him, it's up to me to prove that. Not up to someone else to prove that it's false.

I just arbitrarily used the president as part of a hypothetical scenario where the GM isn't involved in the draft to answer your query, could've used AGM or head scout I suppose.

Sure, that's fair. Appreciate that you are one of the few on either side of this debate that is capable of having an intelligent, rational and civil discussion.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

It's interesting, initially a poster fabricated a story to attempt to discredit the Petterson pick...but after Benning later picked Hughes now there's an attempt by some (this is not directed at @420Canuck) to minimize the role of the GM in drafting in general. Just more convoluted mental gymnastics to give him no credit for anything positive whatsoever. Or to put it more simply - all bad thing are due to Benning, and all good things are due to other staff.

No one is saying that.

 

[4Twenty]

I think it's the onus of the individual making the claim to provide evidence as opposed to other individuals to provide evidence that disputes it. If I start claiming that Benning was all set to draft Nylander and Pastrnak in 2014 but ownership overruled him, it's up to me to prove that. Not up to someone else to prove that it's false.

I just arbitrarily used the president as part of a hypothetical scenario where the GM isn't involved in the draft to answer your query, could've used AGM or head scout I suppose.

Sure, that's fair. Appreciate that you are one of the few on either side of this debate that is capable of having an intelligent, rational and civil discussion.

It takes effort lol. I also don't think westcoastorca would agree to that....I think he's put me on ignore.

You called it a false claim though, I expected you to have some proof it was false, since, you know, you made the claim it was false.

My point was to say somebody else is responsible for the draft, but more that it's a collaboration that GM's often get too much credit/blame for, especially past the first round.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

William Nylander voted PHWA’s best Comeback Player at Midseason - TSN.ca

Frank Seravalli has Jim Benning as a finalist for the GM of the Year award

1. Joe Sakic
2. Jeff Gorton
3. Jim Benning

Lol! That should get a reaction on our board at least!
There’s no way I’d have him in that group. I think in some ways he’s getting recognition for the improvement in the team when that improvement should be expected when you’ve been bad for quite a while.
I’d be more inclined to give some credit to Travis Green as the coach although I think there are a number of better candidates for the Adams.

 

[Toronto makebeleifs]

Outsiders perspective; my opinion of benning has changed. I'd have voted him the worst gm in the league a few years ago, granted those were some stinky teams. His ability to restock the cupboards, put an entertaining product on ice, and have expiring contracts when the youngins are due is quite the change. There's been continual improvement over the last 3 years and van looks poised for a decent finish. The most important thing right now is the nucks are on an upwards trajectory as opposed to continual predictable disappointments that other rebuilding teams have had

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Outsiders perspective; my opinion of benning has changed. I'd have voted him the worst gm in the league a few years ago, granted those were some stinky teams. His ability to restock the cupboards, put an entertaining product on ice, and have expiring contracts when the youngins are due is quite the change. There's been continual improvement over the last 3 years and van looks poised for a decent finish. The most important thing right now is the nucks are on an upwards trajectory as opposed to continual predictable disappointments that other rebuilding teams have had

Thanks for the outside perspective.
I think that’s a pretty balanced view. The only proviso I’d make is that he still needs to show that he won’t hand out bad contracts to simply replace the bad ones that are expiring. The jury is still out on that one and frankly I’m not that confident he’s changed on that part of his job. We will see.

 

[I am toxic]

Lol! That should get a reaction on our board at least!
There’s no way I’d have him in that group. I think in some ways he’s getting recognition for the improvement in the team when that improvement should be expected when you’ve been bad for quite a while.
I’d be more inclined to give some credit to Travis Green as the coach although I think there are a number of better candidates for the Adams.

That's a strange way to spell Ian Clark.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Lol! That should get a reaction on our board at least!
There’s no way I’d have him in that group. I think in some ways he’s getting recognition for the improvement in the team when that improvement should be expected when you’ve been bad for quite a while.
I’d be more inclined to give some credit to Travis Green as the coach although I think there are a number of better candidates for the Adams.

In a vacuum Benning had a good offseason. I mean he brought in Miller, Myers, Ferland, Benn, and Fantenberg along with Hughes joining the team late last season. His additions are certainly responsible for a lot of the success we’ve seen.

It’s more how these look in a few years (where our 1st ends up, how well Myers’ play holds up, and Ferland’s health). We’re probably witnessing the peak value of these players right now, aside from Hughes.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

We'll have to agree to disagree, for the reasons I've earlier listed. If the GM is the one who has the final say on the ultimate draft list (from 1st round to 7 and is an active part of creating that list) and is responsible for the player characteristics that inform that list, as well as being responsible and directly managing all staff involved...well I feel he is responsible for the pick even if he isn't that familiar with the late round prospect in question.

I think you’ve nailed it. Ultimately every success or failure falls on the GM who hires the people, manages them and sets the criteria. Just like any other large business.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

That's a strange way to spell Ian Clark.

Yes. That was a good hire by Benning as well in addition to Green and promoting Brackett. Thanks for pointing that out. I think he’s really improved the goaltending. He deserves a lot of credit.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

In a vacuum Benning had a good offseason. I mean he brought in Miller, Myers, Ferland, Benn, and Fantenberg along with Hughes joining the team late last season. His additions are certainly responsible for a lot of the success we’ve seen.

It’s more how these look in a few years (where our 1st ends up, how well Myers’ play holds up, and Ferland’s health). We’re probably witnessing the peak value of these players right now, aside from Hughes.

First. I apologize for my earlier post. I was out of line and regret it.
I agree for the most part with your post. But I also think we should see some internal growth. There is no doubt that we will need some outside additions to get to the next level. The lack of cap space is a real handicap and probably means those additions won’t happen for another two years and that assumes no more bad contracts.
I see the team as in a similar spot as when Gillis took over last go round. We probably need another better GM to get us there. The tough part is finding those guys as there are a lot of what I consider to be mediocre GMs in the NHL and few really top notch ones.